Complexity in Games

I've been thinking a lot about complexity in games, specifically board games, recently. Several individuals that I have been speaking to (and whose opinions I value) on the matter are of the opinion that all of the best games can be explained in a sentence or less, and that all of them have shallow learning curves.

Now, call me a masochist if you will, but nearly all of my favorite games have steep learning curves. This may be the economist in me, who is a fan of all sorts of modeling and game theory, but there is just something special about sitting down for an hour with a game and figuring it all out. Many of my games, not surprisingly, fall into the simulation and puzzle categories.

I specifically take issue with the idea that people love rolling dice. There is something interesting about leaving your fortune in the hands of lady luck, but I find that it is always overshadowed by frustration when your carefully laid out strategy is demolished in a heartbeat due to a few bad rolls of the dice.

Not that I prefer games that are all strategy. Players should be able to balance off of each other (this is why I prefer 4 player games to 2 player games). Players should be able to walk away from every game session with a sense of accomplishment (I may have lost the game, but man, I laid the smack down on Mike when he tried to invade Africa!). And luck can have a proper role in games. I think that Catan and Vegas Showdown are two games which handle their luck elements very well.

-Jon